A.S. Oka, J.

The submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the Applicants and the learned counsel appearing for the second Respondent were fully heard on 10th February, 2017.

2. Notice for final disposal was already issued. Accordingly, submissions in detail were heard. The present Applicants are admittedly citizens of United Kingdom. The prayer in this Application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') is for quashing the First Information Report registered at the instance of the second Respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 406, 323, 504, 506 and 120 B read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'). The second Respondent is the wife of one Mr. Syed Mohammed Reza Rizvi. The first Applicant in the mother of the husband of the second Respondent and the second Applicant is his sister. The main submission canvassed across the Bar is that the entire cause of action as against the Applicants has arisen in United Kingdom. Reliance was placed on section 4 of IPC and section 188 of the Cr.P.C. Reliance was also placed on a decision of the Apex Court in Fatma Bibi Ahmed Patel v. State of Gujarat and Anr. AIR 2008 SC 2392

3. The submission of the learned counsel for the Applicants is that as all the incidents narrated in the First Information Report have taken place in United Kingdom, the present Applicants cannot be prosecuted for the offences under IPC as the provisions thereof will not apply to the present Applicants.

4. The learned counsel for the second Respondent relied upon several decisions. His submission is that a part of the cause of action has arisen in India. He has submitted that in any case, the Applicants are persons of Indian origin. Today, he has placed on record a document having the caption "how to address issues related to marriages of Indian Women to NRI/PIO". However, on a query being made by the Court, he candidly states that the Applicants are not citizens of India. Relying upon various decisions including the decision of the Apex court in the case of Lee Kun Hee & Ors v. State of U.P. & Others, Criminal Appeal No.304 of 2012 decided on 1st February, 2012 he has submitted that the offence against the Applicants can be tried in India. The learned APP also supported the impugned First Information Report.

5. We have carefully considered the submissions. As stated earlier, it is undisputed that at the relevant time when alleged offence were committed, the Applicants were the resident of United Kingdom and they were the citizens of United Kingdom. They continue to be the citizens and the residents of United Kingdom. It is an admitted position that on the date when the alleged offences were committed, the Applicants were not the citizens of India and even today they are not citizens of India. We have perused the statement of the second Respondent on the basis of the First Information Report registered. She has stated that her marriage was solemnised in Mumbai on 15th April, 2012. She has stated that the entire family of her husband consisting of her husband, her brother-in-law, sisters of the husband, parents of the husband is the resident of London in United Kingdom. She has stated that one year after the marriage was solemnised, she received VISA of United Kingdom. She has stated that when she reached United Kingdom, her family was residing at the address mentioned in her statement. She stated that the sisters of her husband started harassing her. Thereafter, she has narrated an incident of August, 2014. She alleged that in the night, her husband assaulted her and abused her. She stated that the abuses were heard by her mother-in-law and her husband's sister. It is further alleged that she noticed that there were messages exchanged by her husband with another woman. All these incidents, even according to the case of the second Respondent have taken place in United Kingdom.

6. She has further alleged that the sister of the husband's mot